Tuesday, September 16, 2014

The Washington Post Once Again Fails To See That Which Is Right In Front Of It

The WaPo reports that David Brooks unloaded his $4 Million Dollar House That Hack Bought for just under $4.5 million.
New York Times columnist David Brooks sells his $4.5 million home in less than 48 hours
A tidy addition to the Brooks Nest Egg indeed; perhaps enough so that he can finally tell the Sulzberger dynasty "Fuck You!", give up the back-breaking drudgery and endless hours of exhausting research that are synonymous with writing 800 words of whatever-he-wants for the New York Times twice a week...

...and finally embark on that long trip across American so he can touch Indians.

Just like they did in Easy Rider!

Further down the column, the Post notes that while speculation regarding the dissolution of Mr. Brooks' marriage has continued for a year and a half, America's most ubiquitous moral scold and peripatetic Conservative lecturer on the importance of everybody else getting with the program and preserving our sacred social institutions at all costs, ain't answering any of your god damn nosy questions about his god damn marriage, thank you very much god damn it:
Brooks purchased the home with his wife, Sarah, for $3.95 million in July 2012. A year and a half later, the Reliable Source reported that the couple, married for 27 years, were divorcing. Currently there are no records of the Brooks divorce on file in D.C. court, and David Brooks did not return a call for comment.
So there you have it.

Dead end.

Brick wall.

Every possible lead exhausted; every possible source run down.

I mean, what is there left for a dogged reporter to do?

Except, perhaps, bothering to look at any publicly available video of  Mr. Brooks' before November 2013 and any video of Mr. Brooks' after and checking out his left hand.

You know, the hand where the wedding ring goes?


Horace Boothroyd III said...

Am I evil if I want the settlement to suck up every nickel he ever grubbed from the muck of the GOP fever swamps?

Anonymous said...

Plus, also, too, it's not a given that you will file for divorce in the same state or district, i guess, in which you were married. Journalizing is so hard.

Robt said...

Nothing like the smell of conservative family values in the morning !

If they both have very ideological conservative lawyers with deep seated conservative family values, shouldn't the wife lose everything in conservative world?
Then add a conservative family values judge that abhors divorce?

Yet this Brooks family moral failure is supposed to be a Librul Godless experience only. What happened? Did they become liberals or did one or the other fall into the evil vat of liberalism that was beyond reconciliation and party line filibustered their relationship?

What really peaks my interest in your Brooks conservative values story is after the Hobby Lobby case?

If Brooks employer holds his company close and he is religious. The employers religion does not allow for employees to divorce because he holds deeply religious views on divorce that equates to them as abortion and again, the employers deep religious views does not allow for Brooks to divorce . Can his employer fire him for it?
Can his employer deny thee Brooks' divorce?

bowtiejack said...

Hmmm. Fine work DG.

But conservative values and all that aside, in these sort of cases I think the operative principle is "cherchez la femme".

I remember reading a number of years ago some interesting statistical correlations between net income and infidelity. It seems there was a very sharp rise in husbandly misconduct once income soared above $50,000 (as I say, this was a number of years ago). Adjusted for inflation, our David would seem to be well into that zone of, uh, hubris.

Robt said...

By the way,
Have the Brooks' family considered the assault on traditional marriage they are flaunting in the face of decent America?

Is it true that it was the gay marriage that was Brooks' undoing?
The moral fiber of wedlock is faltering because of degrading moral ineptitude as Brooks has scribbled from his word processor in the past. In the name of Republican conservative Christian moral values.

Yastreblyansky said...

Great work, Sherlock! I never thought of looking at his fucking fingers. There was a column where he said something wry about not being the best person to give advice on marriage (wish he'd say he's not the best person to advise on when to have a war, but no luck on that one).

Lit3Bolt said...

How long before David Brooks remarries a nubile 22 year old college grad in Bobonomics?

It'll be true love at first sight, I'm telling you. He gets to pad his male ego; she'll get to pad her bank account from the conservative welfare gravy train.

I mean, you have to have SOMEONE to take to all these fundraisers, don't ya know?

Horace Boothroyd III said...


If all the girls at the Yale Bowl were laid end to end, I for one would not be the least bit surprised.

deering said...

I'd give a million to be the ex-Ms. Brooks' divorce lawyer. :=